Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln


Date of this Version

Winter 7-11-2018



I am sorry I submission this article a few months ago but accidental I choose a withdrawn .please help me


Among the large volume of information existed in the more important fields such as diabetes, the evidence-based resources offer timely the information to the physicians who do not have enough time to study.While the selection of validated sources face challenges in the field of diabetes, this study compare the sources recovered from the evidence-based databases.The design of this research is cross-sectional, survey, descriptive and is an applied type. Preparing a list on clinical questions here was done as referring to the Diabetes Center in Semirom for 5 months. The following keywords were searched on databases: Up To Date, Clinical Key, Embase, Cochrane, Ovid, and PubMed Tool. The data were analyzed using the descriptive and inferential statistics in terms of tables, diagrams, chi-square test. The findings showed that both Ovid and Clinical Key databases recovered more relevant documents in contrast to other databases. According to the most relevant documents. According to the relevant and relatively relevant documents, Clinical Key, Embase, Ovid and Up To Date databases had the highest recall in contrast to the PubMed and Cochrane databases which possessed the lowest recall. According to the most relevant documents, the Ovid Database has the highest precision while the PubMed Database had the lowest precision. Among the databases, up to date had retrieved the relevant documents.Ovid possesses more recall and precision among the databases analyzed, But evidence-based resources are generally well-suited to clinical questions in the field of diabetes